These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
208 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27597866)
1. Comparison of Piezosurgery and Conventional Rotary Instruments for Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars: A Randomized Controlled Clinical and Radiographic Trial. Arakji H; Shokry M; Aboelsaad N Int J Dent; 2016; 2016():8169356. PubMed ID: 27597866 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparative Study of Piezoelectric and Rotary Osteotomy Technique for Third Molar Impaction. Basheer SA; Govind RJ; Daniel A; Sam G; Adarsh VJ; Rao A J Contemp Dent Pract; 2017 Jan; 18(1):60-64. PubMed ID: 28050988 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A prospective split-mouth clinical study: comparison of piezosurgery and conventional rotary instruments in impacted third molar surgery. Menziletoglu D; Basturk F; Isik BK; Esen A Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2020 Mar; 24(1):51-55. PubMed ID: 31811604 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Conventional Rotary Technique and Piezosurgical Technique in the Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molar: A Comparative Study. Hamza SP; Aslam S; Roshni A; Cherian MP; Soman S; Akhila K J Contemp Dent Pract; 2023 Feb; 24(2):97-102. PubMed ID: 37272140 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A comparative analysis of postoperative morbidity and alveolar bone regeneration following surgical extraction of ımpacted lower third molar teeth using piezosurgery and conventional ınstruments: a split-mouth clinical ınvestigation. Erdem MK; Cambazoglu M Eur J Med Res; 2024 Sep; 29(1):460. PubMed ID: 39272144 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Piezoelectric Versus Conventional Rotary Techniques for Impacted Third Molar Extraction: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Jiang Q; Qiu Y; Yang C; Yang J; Chen M; Zhang Z Medicine (Baltimore); 2015 Oct; 94(41):e1685. PubMed ID: 26469902 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A split-mouth randomized clinical trial to evaluate the performance of piezosurgery compared with traditional technique in lower wisdom tooth removal. Mantovani E; Arduino PG; Schierano G; Ferrero L; Gallesio G; Mozzati M; Russo A; Scully C; Carossa S J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2014 Oct; 72(10):1890-7. PubMed ID: 25234524 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparative and clinical evaluation between piezoelectric and conventional rotary techniques for mandibular impacted third molar extraction. Sharma AK; Gupta A; Pabari HP; Pathak SK; Odedra NH; Beniwal J; Arora KS Natl J Maxillofac Surg; 2023; 14(2):208-212. PubMed ID: 37661971 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Postoperative evaluation of Er:YAG laser, piezosurgery, and rotary systems used for osteotomy in mandibular third-molar extractions. Civak T; Ustun T; Yilmaz HN; Gursoy B J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2021 Jan; 49(1):64-69. PubMed ID: 33298388 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A Pilot Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing Piezo Versus Conventional Rotary Surgery for Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars. Saraiva Amaral J; Marto CM; Farias J; Alves Pereira D; Ermida J; Banaco Á; Campos Felino A; Caramelo F; Matos S Bioengineering (Basel); 2022 Jun; 9(7):. PubMed ID: 35877327 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Piezosurgery versus conventional rotary surgery for impacted third molars: A randomised, split-mouth, clinical pilot trial. Demirci A; Bayram F; Dergin G Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal; 2024 Jan; 29(1):e1-e8. PubMed ID: 37992138 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Piezosurgery Versus Conventional Osteotomy: A Comparison of Techniques in the Extraction of Unerupted Mandibular Third Molars in Children. Yang L; Chen Y; Fang W J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2022 Jun; 80(6):1078-1083. PubMed ID: 35300957 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A Clinical Comparison of Er:YAG Laser, Piezosurgery, and Conventional Bur Methods in the Impacted Third Molar Surgery. Genç BGÇ; Orhan K; Or S Photobiomodul Photomed Laser Surg; 2023 Jun; 41(6):283-290. PubMed ID: 37335617 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of piezosurgery and conventional rotatory technique in transalveolar extraction of mandibular third molars: A pilot study. Rashid N; Subbiah V; Agarwal P; Kumar S; Bansal A; Neeraj ; Reddy SG; Chug A J Oral Biol Craniofac Res; 2020; 10(4):615-618. PubMed ID: 32963954 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluation of the effects of platelet-rich fibrin and piezosurgery on outcomes after removal of ımpacted mandibular third molars. Bilginaylar K; Uyanik LO Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2016 Jul; 54(6):629-33. PubMed ID: 27044941 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Postsurgical consequences in lower third molar surgical extraction using micromotor and piezosurgery. Mistry FK; Hegde ND; Hegde MN Ann Maxillofac Surg; 2016; 6(2):251-259. PubMed ID: 28299267 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of Piezosurgery Devices and the Use of Rotatory Devices for the Extraction of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars. Walia S; Verma D; Bansal S; Sutar S; Gupta A; Kardwal K J Pharm Bioallied Sci; 2024 Jul; 16(Suppl 3):S2140-S2142. PubMed ID: 39346438 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Piezoelectric compared with conventional rotary osteotomy for the prevention of postoperative sequelae and complications after surgical extraction of mandibular third molars: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Badenoch-Jones EK; David M; Lincoln T Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2016 Dec; 54(10):1066-1079. PubMed ID: 27832920 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Piezosurgery vs conventional rotary instrument in the third molar surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Liu J; Hua C; Pan J; Han B; Tang X J Dent Sci; 2018 Dec; 13(4):342-349. PubMed ID: 30895143 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A split-mouth study comparing piezo electric surgery and traditional rotary burs on impacted third molars in young patients: an intraoperative and postoperative evaluation. Zara F; De Sanctis CM; Dede FC; Bossù M; Sfasciotti GL Minerva Stomatol; 2020 Oct; 69(5):278-285. PubMed ID: 32407060 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]